Soybean yield depending on the schemes of pre-sowing treatment of seeds with different-acting biological preparations
Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of the work was to study the complex effect of the drugs Rizotorphin (2.0 kg/t) and Vimpel (1.0 l/t) on the processes of plant growth and development, to establish the effect of biological preparations on the formation of the generative organs of the soybean plant. Methods. Research methods: field, laboratory, analytical, statistical. Monitoring of the growth and development of soybean plants was carried out according to the methodology of the State Variety Testing of Agricultural Crops, yield data were processed by the method of dispersion analysis using the MS Excel program package. Results. Complex application of drugs increased the leaf surface area to 33.8 thousand m2/ha, additionally receiving 8.1 thousand m2/ha of assimilation area. The ratio of pigments a and b in the control version in the flowering phase was 71% to 29%. At the same time, in the specified variant, the mass of pigments was 153 mg/100 g. The use of Vympel when the mass of pigments increased to 183.7 in terms of qualitative indicators was inferior to the effect of Rizotorphin and the ratio was 71% to 29%, which is similar to the control. The combined effect of the drugs increased the effect of Rizotorphine by 10% with the same ratio of pigments a and b as the variant with Rizotorphine. According to the research results, the use of Rhizorthorphin almost doubled the number of nodules on one plant during the flowering phase. The growth of this indicator in the case of seed treatment with a biostimulant was not so obvious – only by 20%. But the joint action stimulated the formation of nodules 2.3 times. On the control variant, 19.5 beans per plant were formed. Treatment of seeds with Rizotorfin increased this indicator by 14.6%. By 16%, the individual effect of the drugs was enhanced by their complex use. The study also revealed an increase in weight indicators of grain productivity on soybean plants. In the case of inoculation, the mass of 1000 seeds increased by 3.7 g to 165.5 g. The mass of 1000 seeds was almost similar in the variant with complex application of drugs. The growth regulator had a smaller effect on the increase in this weight indicator. When processing seeds with Rhizohumin, an increase in yield was determined at the level of 0.24 t/ha, which gave a total of 2.33 t/ha. The use of a growth regulator gave an increase of 0.09 t/ha. The yield of this option did not differ significantly from the control. Combined treatment of seeds with an inoculant and a growth regulator gave an increase in yield of 0.25 t/ha. The results of our research established a significant impact of the complex use of Rhizorthorphin and Vympel on the vegetative mass of the plant. Conclusions. After considering the main regularities and trends, it was established: the effect of the combined action of the inoculant (Rhizotorphin) and the growth bioregulator (Pennant) differed from the individual action of the drugs. The joint action of the drugs gives a significant advantage over other schemes of seed treatment in the formation of the leaf surface and the work of the assimilation apparatus. The complex use of drugs leads to an increase in the number of nodules and the work of the symbiotic apparatus, and also allowed the formation of an additional number of grains and the output of grain from the plant. Combined treatment of seeds increased the dry weight of plants, taking into account all preparations, negatively affected the field germination and the formation of plant stand density. The yield generated when treated with Rizotorfin and Vympel did not exceed the yield from inoculated seeds.
References
2. Даценко В.К., Малієнко С.М., Береговенко С.К., Коць С.Я. Нові агрохімікати як засіб підвищення азотфіксувальної здатності сої. Онтогенез рослин, біологічна фіксація молекулярного азоту та азотний метаболізм. Тернопіль, 2001. С. 69–72.
3. Гриценко В.О., Бердін С.І., Мурач О.М. Вплив фактору архітектоніки куща на продуктивність сої. Гончарівські читання. Матеріали міжнар. наук.-практ.конф. Суми, 2023. С. 81–83.
4. Глущак А.Г., Зеленський В.А. Вплив окремих елементів технології вирощування на урожайність різних сортів сої. Аграрна наука-селу: міжвід. наук. зб. Чернівці: Буковина, 1997. Вип. 3(1). С. 66–69.
5. Бабич А.О., Бабич А.А. Селекція, виробництво, торгівля і використання сої. Київ. Аграрна наука, 2011. 548 с.
6. Ткачук О.П., Дідур І.М., Панцирева Г.В. Екологічна оцінка середньостиглих і середньо пізньостиглих сортів сої. Сільське господарство та лісівництво. 2022. № 1(24). С. 5–15.
7. Перелік пестицидів і агрохімікатів, дозволених до використання в Україні. Київ: Юнівест Маркетинг, 2020. 895 с.
8. Волкодав В.В. Методика державного сортовипробування сільськогосподарських культур. Київ, 2001. Вип. ІІ.
9. Бердін С.І. Використання табличного процесору EXCEL 7.0 для проведення обробки даних досліджень методом однофакторного дисперсійного аналізу. Вісник Сумського державного аграрного унiверситету. Суми, 1999. Вип. 3. С. 31–34.